← Back to Search
Brandon Stokes v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20253701)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 12-16-2025
ClosedAppealDecision
SPR 20253701 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Brandon Stokes concerning records held by Boston, City of - Police Department, opened 12-16-2025. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20253701
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Brandon Stokes
- Custodian
- Boston, City of - Police Department
- Date Opened
- 12-16-2025
- Date Closed
- 01-13-2026
- Extended Deadline
- 01-15-2026
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 13, 2026 SPR25/3701 Christine O’Donnell, Esq. Assistant Corporation Counsel Office of the Legal Advisor Boston Police Department 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney O’Donnell: I have received the petition of Brandon Stokes, of 7NEWS WHDH Boston, appealing the response of the Boston Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 11, 2025, Mr. Stokes requested “Boston Police bodycam video of officers responding to the scene of an apparent explosion at the Goldenson Building on the campus of Harvard University around 2:48am on 11/1/25.” The Department responded on November 15, 2025, assigning the request reference number B003277- 111125. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Stokes petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3701, was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any agency or municipality of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832 • Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us Christine O’Donnell, Esq. SPR25/3701 Page 2 January 13, 2026 If there are any fees associated with a response, a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The Department’s November 15th Response In its November 15, 2025 response, the Department cited Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law to withhold the responsive records. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Stokes argued against the applicability of Exemption (f) and stated, “[t]he records cannot be withheld in their entirety.” In addition, Mr. Stokes provided “highly-detailed publicly-available court documents” concerning the events described in requested records. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, this office reviewed the docket of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts and learned that criminal litigation, relating to the records that are the subject of Mr. Stokes’ request, remains active and ongoing. See United States of America v. Logan David Patterson and Dominick Frank Cardoza (District Court, D. Massachusetts; Docket Number 1:25-mj-03286). Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. In light of the pending litigation, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Additionally, I decline to opine on the applicability of Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law to the requested records. Please note that a change in the status of the above matter could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Brandon Stokes